There isn't a lot to remember from this run-of-the-mill low-budget slasher. 3 young couples and their douchebag friend intrude a disaffected tower for a night of partying. Unbeknownst to them, a hulking figure haunts the abode with its machete and starts dismembering them one by one.There's no build-up and/or tension. The origins of the killer are mostly unexplored, save for a brief flashback to an asylum escape in the prologue. Though he's big, he's never really menacing and I found his decrepit mother to be a much more interesting foe. Unfortunately, she only intervenes at the the very end of the movie.Slashers all run the same formula and maybe this would have worked with a bigger cast (more deaths = more fun). The only surprise is to be found in the final survivor, who I thought would be the first to be dismissed. And that's a good thing because he's also the cutest.

As the other reviews mentioned, this movie looks scary and intriguing when one glances at the box. But when my friends and I put in this disk, huddled in blankets and ready to be scared to death, we soon realized that there would be no need for any protection, and we even had to turn the volume up so we could hear over our insane laughter. The beginning was a joke - the explicit song playing over a series of repeated clips of the killers feet, then a five - minute opening credits scene consisting of an elevator opening and closing, revealing the names of cast and producers. The camera seemed to be (or was) hand-held, and although this may have been effective in some scenes, it was not for the entire movie. And don't get me started on the janitor scene at the beginning. Did you notice the obvious hosepipe sticking out of the "stump where his arm used to be"? What was supposed to be gore turned into something out of an Itchy and Scrachy cartoon, and the useless "twist?" of an ending had us cracking up for hours. Another thing that had us in hysterics: the use of the word "butt rash" while playing the Ouija board (perhaps they had crossed out "momopoly" and written "Ouija" in glowing letters?). All in all, this film is explicit, rude, but a great laugh if you need cheering up.

What a rip-off! What did the box art say? Fifty stories, Five hundred inhabitants, Zero survivors. Lies on all counts. Granted, companies often take liberties with the box art. The monsters are never as cool looking in the film as they are on the box. (That could be said for the actors and actresses too.) However, this time they want too far. The box art showed a building which looked like a cross between New York's Flat Iron Building and a Medieval Castle. The villain looked cool too. Then we have the tag line: Fifty stories, Five Hundred Inhabitants, Zero Survivors. First off, I didn't see fifty floors, just a rooftop and a few shabby rooms and corridors that could have been anywhere. As for the 500 inhabitants – what a freaking lie. The building is abandoned. And, in a way, there is a survivor. Wrong on all counts. One of the reasons I was anxious to see this film was that the box made me believe it had an epic scale. Wrong. Just another 1980's slasher ripoff. (The biggest difference is that the breasts were real back in the 1980s!) It did have some gore. That might satisfy some fans of the genre, but it wasn't enough for me.

I was excited when I spotted this film on the shelf of my local Blockbuster. Judging from the box art and the blurb on the back, it sounded like it could be a slasher film in the traditions of the slasher explosion of the late 70's and 80's. I love that genre. Films such as "Slumber Party Massacre," "The Burning," and "Hide and Go Shriek" just don't get made anymore. But on to "Tower of Blood." The plot is pretty flimsy-a group of teens decide to party in an abandoned high rise building, only to be killed off by a masked killer armed with a machete. Now, if you are a fan of slasher films, there is certainly worse than this out there. What this film has going for it is its atmosphere and setting. The building is indeed creepy, although I would hesitate to call it a tower. I believe it has three stories to it? The director does a good job of controlling the lighting--there always seems to be just a tint of red in each scene that gives the film a sense of dread. As for the gore, and isn't bad for a slasher film made in 2005, where gore in horror films is becoming quickly a thing of the past due to conservation pressure and calling for "family entertainment." There is a decent decapitation, though it becomes painfully obvious that the head is plastic. Also, two teens gets impaled a'la Friday the 12th Part 2 with a machete. The films downfalls come from its extremely slow pace and lack of charisma and enthusiasm of the cast. It's a fairly short film, not even over 80 minutes, I believe, but the pace is incredibly slow. Once the teens (thought most of them look to be in their thirties) arrive at the Tower, we are exposed to several long, boring scenes of them chatting, and playing with a Ouija board. And while the cast members are pretty to look at, none of them will be winning Oscars anytime soon. However, that stuff COULD be forgiven if it wasn't for the terrible, terrible, off the wall ending that makes absolutely no sense and leaves the viewer confused. Those if you who have seen the 80's classic "Slaughter High" will be familiar with the type of ending this film has. Utter stupidity that really brought an OK slasher flick down a few notches. However, I suppose I would recommend this film to die-hard slasher fans. You certainly aren't going to get anything new here, but the last 15 minutes or so of the film are pretty decent, up until that cheesy ending!!!!!! 4 out of 10